I would really like to have a place, where the part authors can write on which part(s) they are actually working.
Maybe divided in: long term process and short term process.
This should not mean, that we should write such a message for a part that's done in a couple of hours, but ween your are working on a part for some days or weeks, it is much more frustrating, if someone else loads this part into the PT and you have "wasted" your time.

/Max

dear LSC, could we pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze get rid of the annoyance that
users cannot comment on ongoing discussions within the LSC forum?
I feel this an unproductive and unnecessary restriction.

For example, I just wanted to answer this post
http://forums.ldraw.org/showthread.php?t...19#pid7319
which wrote
"Filename is the relative path to the file, relative to the P or PARTS directory."
, and I wanted to add that this should read probably better
"Filename is the relative path to the file, relative to the current folder, the MODELS or PARTS or P folder, in this order"
, but I wasn't able to....

I cannot imagine what such a posting restriction should be good for :-|||

I'm in need of 1L and 2L 3mm flex hose parts. The flex hose parts I have seems to start at 3L and go up from there.

Thanks in advance!

Here is my latest LDraw tools... it finds its roots in this Steffen post. I tried to add a few features to make it more useful and flexible



Selector utility allows to select surface elements by extending a key-colored surface to its neighbours. This expansion can stop on various criteria, meeting of an edge line or of a sharp enough angle, or extend to all connected elements. Edge lines or conditional lines enclosed or bordering selection can be selected too. The selection is done by changing color of elements to key color. Optionally, selection can be moved to the end of output LDraw file.

Leonardo just announced a new LeoCAD version! As you can see, the BIG news is that this version can work directly with regular LDraw library. My own tests shows that on some machines, there maybe a speed penalty, as loading library may take a while at startup. Alternatively, you can also zip your LDraw folder (or directly use complete.zip), it's much faster then.

The support of texmap is great too! (only planar projection)

Quote: I've uploaded a new version to the website, you can download it from http://leocad.org/files/.
The biggest change is in the pieces library, it uses a new format and can optionally use the LDraw library directly. This will fix some rendering bugs that were noticeable on stickers, colored patterns and pieces with detailed geometry and also adds support to Joshua's texture mapping extension.

Version 0.79 (13/12/2012)
* Switched to a new library file format.
* Added support for texture mapped pieces.
* Added support for using the LDraw library directly.
* Load color config from ldconfig.ldr where the library is located.
* Save view layout between sessions.
* Allow the pieces search text box to auto-complete when entering piece numbers.
* Fixed errors on big endian computers.
* Zoom extents after loading a file.

I hope this is in the "right" section; if not, mods, give the noob a thousand e-lashes.

I'm working on a 3D app right now, and have had way too much "fun" in working with the Ldraw file format. I would not call my work anywhere close to compliant with the Ldraw spec, but suffice to say, I've made some progress...and along the way, rediscovered linear algebra, projections, angles, and more.

Here's a pic of what I've got working so far.


Now, for my questions:

-How do you approach non-certified BFC files? Do you check for bowtied parts? Do you treat it as uncertified even if it only contains subparts/primitives? Unfortunately, due to resource limitations, I cannot simply duplicate every noncertified polygon I come across, so I've had to learn to process said polygons as if they are two-sided (which has NOT been fun). I cannot recall, but somewhere between 2997/2998 and 6581/6582, I encountered flipped polygons, bowtied polygons, and more...enough that I have a headache from all that checking.

-Do you have any recommendations on how to perfect normal smoothing? If I find two triangles meet at an angle 180 += 30, I consider them to be part of a curve and I smooth them proportionally to the triangle corner angles. I seem to get a little too much smoothing out of that, but I need to be able to catch at least 180+=22.5 to smooth the stubs (plus using the 48 versions isn't an option).

-How accurate are the ldraw parts? This may be a very bold statement to make, but I do plan to perform intelligent part snapping based solely on the polygons I extract from a ldr file.

-Legally: Can "The Lego Group" prevent me from selling an app I make (provided that I do not use their trademark)? If I want to use the ldraw parts library, what's the recommended way to share it? It seems that, aside from parts/756.dat parts/s/2336s35.dat, I could distribute the zip myself. (Edit: nevermind per #2. I see there's a link for CCAL-compliant parts).

-is there anything you wish you had known when you started working on your program?

Thanks in advance

The following thread says that the current documentation for the 0 Name: line in the LDraw spec is incorrect:

http://forums.ldraw.org/showthread.php?t...56#pid7256

While I personally feel that the current documentation is more ambiguous than outright wrong (there's some ambiguity in the term "filename"), I agree that it would be better for the spec to be clear and unambiguous.

This is my first post. I hope I follow all guidelines.

I want to know the dimensions of a cheese slope tile. I have downloaded the 54200.dat parts file, but I'm not sure how to interpret it. Can anybody help me?

I am interested in knowing the exact length of the side with a length of approximately 8.5mm:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ltdemartinet/4293993602

Thank you,
Tommy

Here are the contents of 54200.dat:
0 Slope Brick 31 1 x 1 x 2/3
0 Name: 54200.dat
0 Author: Orion Pobursky [OrionP]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Part UPDATE 2009-02
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !HISTORY 2006-01-14 [cwdee] Rotated to match other slope bricks
0 !HISTORY 2009-09-03 [PTadmin] Official Update 2009-02

2 24 10 -16 10 10 -1 10
2 24 -10 -16 10 -10 -1 10
2 24 -10 -4 -10 -10 -1 -10
2 24 10 -4 -10 10 -1 -10
2 24 10 -1 10 -10 -1 10
2 24 10 -1 -10 -10 -1 -10
2 24 10 -16 10 -10 -16 10
2 24 10 -4 -10 -10 -4 -10
2 24 10 -1 10 10 -1 -10
2 24 -10 -1 10 -10 -1 -10
2 24 -10 -16 10 -10 -4 -10
2 24 10 -16 10 10 -4 -10
4 16 -10 -16 10 -10 -1 10 -10 -1 -10 -10 -4 -10
4 16 10 -16 10 10 -4 -10 10 -1 -10 10 -1 10
4 16 10 -16 10 10 -1 10 -10 -1 10 -10 -16 10
4 16 6 -10.6 6 -6 -10.6 6 -6 0 6 6 0 6
4 16 6 -3.4 -6 6 0 -6 -6 0 -6 -6 -3.4 -6
4 16 10 -4 -10 -10 -4 -10 -10 -1 -10 10 -1 -10
4 16 -10 -16 10 -10 -4 -10 10 -4 -10 10 -16 10
2 24 9 0 9 -9 0 9
2 24 9 0 -9 -9 0 -9
1 16 0 -1 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 -9 0 0 box4.dat
4 16 10 -1 -10 9 -1 -9 9 -1 9 10 -1 10
4 16 -10 -1 10 -9 -1 9 -9 -1 -9 -10 -1 -10
4 16 10 -1 10 9 -1 9 -9 -1 9 -10 -1 10
4 16 -10 -1 -10 -9 -1 -9 9 -1 -9 10 -1 -10
4 16 6 0 -6 6 0 6 9 0 9 9 0 -9
4 16 -6 0 6 -6 0 -6 -9 0 -9 -9 0 9
4 16 -6 0 -6 6 0 -6 9 0 -9 -9 0 -9
4 16 6 0 6 -6 0 6 -9 0 9 9 0 9
4 16 6 -10.6 6 6 0 6 6 0 -6 6 -3.4 -6
4 16 -6 -10.6 6 -6 -3.4 -6 -6 0 -6 -6 0 6
2 24 6 0 6 -6 0 6
2 24 6 0 -6 -6 0 -6
2 24 6 0 -6 6 0 6
2 24 -6 0 -6 -6 0 6
2 24 6 -10.6 6 -6 -10.6 6
2 24 6 -3.4 -6 -6 -3.4 -6
2 24 6 -3.4 -6 6 -10.6 6
2 24 -6 -3.4 -6 -6 -10.6 6
2 24 -6 -10.6 6 -6 0 6
2 24 6 -10.6 6 6 0 6
2 24 6 -3.4 -6 6 0 -6
2 24 -6 -3.4 -6 -6 0 -6
4 16 -6 -10.6 6 6 -10.6 6 6 -4 -5 -6 -4 -5
3 16 -3.1092 -4 -5 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
5 24 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 -3.1092 -4 -5 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434
4 16 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434 0 -4 -6 0 -3.4 -6 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
5 24 0 -4 -6 0 -3.4 -6 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434 2.2961 -4 -5.5434
4 16 0 -4 -6 2.2961 -4 -5.5434 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 0 -3.4 -6
5 24 2.2961 -4 -5.5434 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 3.1092 -4 -5 2.2961 -4 -5.5434
3 16 3.1092 -4 -5 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 2.2961 -4 -5.5434
2 24 -3.1092 -4 -5 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434
2 24 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434 0 -4 -6
2 24 2.2961 -4 -5.5434 0 -4 -6
2 24 3.1092 -4 -5 2.2961 -4 -5.5434
2 24 -3.1092 -4 -5 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
2 24 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 0 -3.4 -6
2 24 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 0 -3.4 -6
2 24 3.1092 -4 -5 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
2 24 -3.1092 -4 -5 3.1092 -4 -5
4 16 -3.1092 -4 -5 0 -4 -5 0 -4 -6 -2.2961 -4 -5.5434
4 16 3.1092 -4 -5 2.2961 -4 -5.5434 0 -4 -6 0 -4 -5
4 16 -3.1092 -4 -5 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 -6 -3.4 -6 -6 -4 -5
3 16 -6 -3.4 -6 -2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434 0 -3.4 -6
4 16 3.1092 -4 -5 6 -4 -5 6 -3.4 -6 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
3 16 6 -3.4 -6 0 -3.4 -6 2.2961 -3.674 -5.5434
0

I believe this part is not available, neither are its separate components: http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/2740c01
Is anyone willing and able to model it?

It took me about ten years to realize that the 0 Name: entry is not used by any application. It is only there to identify the part and the licenses that it is under!

By reading the specs carefully for the 0 Name: entry I found in the Official Library Header Specification only the description that the 0 Name: entry is followed by the filename!
I doubt that 's\file.dat' or '48\file.dat' is a filename. It is a filename with relative path information.

For the '48' I can imagine that this is neccessary to address, as there might be a file with the same name in the 'p' folder. To know which of the files the current context is, it makes sense to add that ('48') information to the filename.

For the 's' the above mentioned is not correct, as subfiles needs to carry a 's' in the filename. So there cannot be any double file name. So my guess is that this is only added because we cannot avoid the '48' entry and by doing it this way all subdirectories of parts and p are addressed the same way.

But the above are mainly my thoughts (nothing is written about that) and so one main question still exists for me:
1) Why do we add the prefix to the filename? No application uses that line as it is not recommended in the File Format 1.0.2
2) Why does the Official Library Header Specification did not mention the use of the path prefix for 's' and '48'?